Composite Structures 121 (2015) 406419

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Composite Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compstruct

Initial and progressive failure analyses for composite laminates using

Puck failure criterion and damage-coupled nite element method
Chi-Seung Lee, Jeong-Hyeon Kim, Seul-kee Kim, Dong-Man Ryu, Jae-Myung Lee
Department of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, Pusan National University, Busan 609-735, Republic of Korea

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Available online 18 November 2014
Keywords:
Composite laminates
Puck failure criterion
Damage mechanics
Progressive failure
ABAQUS user-dened subroutine

a b s t r a c t
In the present study, an evaluation method for the initial and progressive failure of composite laminates was
proposed based on the Puck failure criterion and damage mechanics, respectively. In other words, the initial
failure (crack initiation in the ber and/or matrix) and progressive failure (crack growth in the ber and/or
matrix) were evaluated using the Puck failure criterion, and ber- and matrix-dependent damage variables,
respectively. In addition, the ABAQUS user-dened subroutine UMAT was developed based on coupling theories for the failure criterion and damage mechanics in order to efciently analyze the progressive failure
phenomenon in glass/carbon ber-reinforced composite laminates. The developed subroutine was applied
to the failure of industrial composite laminates, and the analysis results were compared to the experimental/numerical results previously reported in the literature. This comparative study conrmed that the simulation results were in good agreement with the reported composite failure results.
2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Owing to the many advantages of glass/carbon ber-reinforced
composite laminates, including their light weight, robust specic
stiffness and strength, and superior vibration, noise, and electromagnetic wave damping capacities, the application of such composite laminates to industrial structures has been rapidly increasing
during the last few decades. One application example for composite
laminates involves subsea umbilicals, risers, and owlines (SURF).
The reeling performance is the most crucial capability of SURF. In
other words, a low material stiffness and high tensile strength are
in great demand during the installation and operation of SURF.
Therefore, composite laminates are more suitable materials than
metal-class materials [1]. In addition, composite marine propellers
for naval ships and submarines have recently been fabricated from
carbon-reinforced composite materials rather than NiAlBronze
or MnNiAlBronze because they provide high fuel efciency
and low underwater radiated noise [2,3].
In these recent applications of composite laminates, only classic
failure criteria such as the maximum stress/strain, TsaiHill, and
TsaiWu criteria have been considered during the static analyses
of composite structures. According to above failure criteria, the
composite laminates are postulated as single orthotropic materials.
For this reason, the local failure in a region of the ber and/or matrix
under a particular stress combination cannot be calculated [4,5].
Corresponding author. Tel.: +82 51 510 2342; fax: +82 51 512 8836.
E-mail address: jaemlee@pusan.ac.kr (J.-M. Lee).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2014.11.011
0263-8223/ 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

In order to overcome the aforementioned problem, Hashin

proposed a separate failure criterion for ber and matrix collapse
by introducing fracture plane-dependent stress components [4].
And then, Puck and Schrmann enhanced Hashins failure criterion
by implementing the angle of fracture plane and proposed three
kinds of fracture modes: inter-ber failures under tensile stress
on the plane perpendicular to the ber direction and in-plane shear
stress (mode A), failure due to a small compressive stress on the
plane perpendicular to the ber direction and large in-plane shear
stress (mode B), and failure due to a large compressive stress on
the plane perpendicular to the ber direction and small in-plane
shear stress (mode C) [5]. In particular, the Puck criterion has been
veried by many researchers and engineers through experiments
and numerical analyses [69].
However, it is quite arduous to apply the Puck criterion to industrial elds because the theory is very complex, and there are no
appropriate commercial nite element analysis (FEA) codes that
contain the Puck criterion as a default option. Accordingly, there
have been few reports containing application examples of the Puck
criterion in the elds of naval architectural engineering and aerospace engineering. Nevertheless, both the ber failure and interber failure should be estimated prior to the design and fabrication
of particular industrial structures such as wind turbine blades [10].
On the other hand, the initial ber failure is the main design
criterion to ensure the structural safety of a composite structure.
In other words, the failure of a single ber represents the total
failure of the structure. However, this design criterion is too
redundant and conservative, and it is laborious to describe the

407

C.-S. Lee et al. / Composite Structures 121 (2015) 406419

progressive failure of the ber and/or matrix under increasing

static loads or cyclic fatigue loads.
In order to remove the aforementioned obstacle, tensile,
compressive, shear, and fatigue tests of composite laminates are
commonly carried out to investigate the failure features from the
initial to nal failure. Although such material tests are considered
to be reliable and straightforward, a huge investment in time and
cost are needed to establish the experimental facilities.
As an alternative approach, a damage mechanics-coupled FEA
method is widely adopted nowadays. Based on damage mechanics,
it is feasible to quantitatively describe the relationship between
the increase in a materials internal defects and the decrease in
its stiffness. Although it requires a somewhat substantial amount
of computational time, it is possible to simulate the progressive
damage to a composite structure using the simple material properties of a composite laminate.
There is a large body of literature on the progressive failure analysis of composites, much of which exploits the damage mechanics
and material stiffness degradation methods. Chang and Chang [11]
carried out two kinds of composite laminate analyses. They
assessed the stress and strain on the basis of the classical lamination theory and calculated the damage accumulations using a material degradation-implemented failure criterion that they proposed.
Their research conrmed that the results of a numerical analysis of
the initial and progressive failures of center-notched composite
laminates under tensile loads coincided well with those of experiments. Tay et al. [12] proposed an element failure method to effectively express the damage growth in a framework of nite
elements. Progressive failures were detected using various types
of failure models such as the TsaiWu and micromechanics-based
failure criteria, and the results of numerical analyses were compared to the tensile test results for double-notched composite laminates. Liu and Zheng [13] developed an energy-based damage
model to predict the damage/aw propagation in three-dimensional (3D) composite cylindrical laminates, which were fabricated
using a lament winding method. Three kinds of failure modes
were proposed (i.e., ber breakage, matrix cracking, and ber/
matrix interface shear failure), along with their associated damage
evolution laws, which incorporated different damage variables and
conjugate forces. The numerical analysis results were compared to
the amounts of internal pressure and radial displacement in a burst
test of a composite cylindrical storage vessel.
In addition, there have been a few similar studies on simulation
methods and damage models for the progressive failure of
composite laminates, e.g., a failure model based on a generalized
laminate plate theory [14], an LaRC04 failure criterion-orthotropic
damage model that took into account the crack closure effect

[15,16], a fully 3D continuum damage model [17], a micromechanical model based on a unit cell [18], and a Hashin failure
criterion-material properties degradation model [19].
In these studies, the onset and growth of composite internal
defects were successfully analyzed, but there were two kinds of
challenging factors for industrial utilization. First, the assessment
method was conducted in the framework of in-house FEA code
rather than commercial FEA code such as ABAQUS. Second, the
initial failure was estimated using only the criterion of Hashin
rather than that of Puck. However, many classication societies
such as Germanischer Lloyd specify the use of the Puck criterion
for the identication of the initial failure, as discussed above. For
this reason, it is extremely burdensome to employ the aforementioned methodologies in industrial applications.
Hence, in the present study, the initiation and progression of the
internal damage to a composite laminate were practically analyzed
using the Puck failure criterion, as well as a damage mechanicsbased material properties degradation model. In addition, the introduced model was implemented in the ABAQUS user-dened subroutine UMAT to facilitate the accessible utilization of a composite
structure failure analysis. Finally, in order to validate the proposed
analysis method, the analysis results were compared to the failure
test results for composite laminates reported in the literature.
2. Theories for initial and progressive failure of composite
laminates
2.1. Initial failure theory based on Puck failure criterion
Hashin pointed out the limitation of classical failure criteria such
as the maximum stress/strain, TsaiHill, and TsaiWu criteria, and
Table 3
EWM conditions for each failure mode.
Failure mode

Condition for validity

Damage value

Tensile ber mode

Compressive ber mode
Tensile matrix mode
Compressive matrix mode

(1)
(2)
(3)
(4) and (5)

dft = 1
dfc = 1
dmt = 1
dmc = 1

Table 1
Application conditions for Puck failure criterion.
Equation

Condition for validity

(1)

e1 mEff121 mrf r22 P 0

(2)

e1 mEff121 mrf r22 < 0

r22 P 0
 
A
vv
r22 < 0 and 0 6 rs2122  6 jsR21c
j

(3)
(4)

j
r22 < 0 and 0 6 rs2122  6 jsR21c
A

(5)

vv

Table 2
Recommended values for inclination parameters.
Parameter

p
vp
p
vp


pvv

Value
GFRP/Epoxy

CFRP/Epoxy

0.30

0.35

0.25

0.30

0.200.25

0.250.30

Fig. 1. Algorithm for ABAQUS user-dened subroutine.

408

C.-S. Lee et al. / Composite Structures 121 (2015) 406419

Table 4
Material properties of E-glass 21xK43/LY556 and AS4/3501-6 test specimens.
Property

E-glass 21xK43/LY556

AS4/3501-6

E11 (MPa)
E22 (MPa)
G12 (MPa)

53,480
17,700
5830
0.278
80,000
0.2
2.132
1.065
1140
570
35
114
72

126,000
11,000
6600
0.28
225,000
0.2
1.380
1.175
1950
1480
48
200
79

m12
Ef1 (MPa)

mf12
e1T (%)
e1C (%)
XT (MPa)
XC (MPa)
YT (MPa)
YC (MPa)
S12 (MPa)

Table 5
Thicknesses of E-glass 21xK43/LY556 and AS4/3501-6 test specimens.
E-glass 21xK43/LY556

AS4/3501-6

Ply
orientation ()

Ply thickness
(mm)

Ply orientation
()

Ply thickness
(mm)

90
+30
30

Total thickness (mm)

0.172
0.414
0.414

2.0

90
+45
45
0

0.1375
0.1375
0.1375
0.1375
1.1

proposed four kinds of unique failure functions [4]. Unlike the classical failure criteria, in the Hashin failure function, the equations are
divided into the tensile and compressive parts, and more complex
terms are introduced for matrix failure under compressive loads.
After two decades, Puck and Schrmann modied and enhanced
the Hashin failure criterion, i.e., the ber failure was calculated
based on the material properties of the ber itself rather than those
of the ply, and the matrix failure was divided into three
different stress states, including the transverse tension (mode A),
moderate transverse compression (mode B), and large transverse
compression (mode C). In addition, an equation was proposed for
determining the angle of the new fracture plane that was
generated during the fracture of a composite laminate.

The Puck failure criterion can be written as follows.

(1) Fiber failure in tension

e1

e1T

mf 12
Ef 1

mrf r22

(2) Fiber failure in compression




mf 12
1 
2

e

m
r
1
rf 22  10c21 1

e1C
E

f1

(3) Matrix failure in transverse tension

s
 2 
2  2
s21
YT
r22
r22 r11
pv p
1  pv p

1
S21
S21
YT
S21 r11D

(4) Matrix failure in moderate transverse compression

q

s221 pv p r22 2 pv p r22

1
S21

r11
1
r11D

(5) Matrix failure in large transverse compression

"

s21

21 pvv S21

2

r22

2 #

YC

YC
r11
1

r22 r11D

where e1T and e1C are the tensile and compressive failure
strains of a unidirectional layer in the x1 direction, respectively; e1 is the normal strain of a unidirectional layer; mf12
and Ef1 are Poissons ratio and Youngs modulus for the ber
in the x1 direction, respectively; mrf is the mean stress magnication factor for the bers in the x2 direction; r11 and r22
are the normal stresses in a unidirectional layer; c21 and s21
are the shear strain and stress of a unidirectional layer in the
elastic symmetry direction, respectively; S21 is the shear
strength of a unidirectional layer transverse and parallel to


the ber direction; p
v p , pv p , and pvv are the fracture plane
angle-dependent parameters; and r11D is the stress value
for linear degradation.

(a) Ply stacking sequence [90/30]S

(b) 90 fiber angle direction at 1st ply

(c) +30 fiber angle direction at 2nd ply

(d) -30 fiber angle direction at 3rd ply

Fig. 2. Ply stacking sequence and ber angle direction for E-glass/LY556 composite laminate.

409

C.-S. Lee et al. / Composite Structures 121 (2015) 406419

The application conditions for Eqs. (1)(5) are listed in Table 1. In

this table, RAvv is the fracture resistance of the action plane against its
fracture due to transverse/transverse shear stressing, and s21c is the
shear stress at the turning point of the (r22, s21) fracture curve.
On the other hand, the main parameters for the Puck failure
A


criterion such as p
v p , pv p , pvv , Rvv , and s21c can be obtained by using
the following formulae.



ds21
pv p 
dr22 r2 0

of

r22 ; s21 cur v e;

r22 P 0



ds21
pv p 
dr22 r2 0

of

r22 ; s21 cur v e;

r22 6 0

Y
S21
Rvv

21 pvv 2pv p
A

s
!
YC

1 2pv p
1
S21

RA
pvv pv p vv
S21

s21c S21 1 2pvv

10


However, it is arduous to obtain some parameters such as p
v p , pv p ,

and pvv because the (r22, s21) curve should be obtained using a series of experiments. Accordingly, Puck et al. [20] recommended
using the values listed in Table 2.

2.2. Progressive failure theory based on damage mechanics

From the phenomenological viewpoint, the defect initiation/propagation phenomenon for a material is strongly related to the degradation of the materials capacity, and the most visible aspect is the
deterioration of the materials stiffness. Therefore, it is possible to
Table 6
Loading cases for initial failure analysis.
Case

Laminate
layup

Material

Loading case

A
B
C

[90/30]S

E-glass/LY556

[90/45/0]S

AS4/3501-6

Biaxial failure stress envelope (ry vs rx)

Biaxial failure stress envelope (rx vs sxy)
Biaxial failure stress envelope (ry vs rx)

describe the progressive failure of a composite laminate by numerically representing the correlation between an increase in the materials internal damage and a decrease in the materials stiffness.
There are numerous damage models for identifying the internal
damage for various materials. Toi and Lee [21] and Lee et al. [22]
adopted the Lemaitre damage model to solve the thermal-induced
failure and fatigue failure problems of hot-dip galvanized structural members and welded structures, respectively. Lee et al. [23]
employed the GursonTvergaard void growth model to identify
the debonding failure problem of adhesively bonded joints. Kim
et al. [24,25], Lee et al. [26] and Kim et al. [27] used the isotropic
BodnerChan damage model to describe the crack propagation
problems as well as the damage-induced viscoplastic behavior of
austenitic stainless steel structural members. Lee and Lee [28]
applied the anisotropic BodnerChan damage model to calculate
the progressive failure of a glass-ber-reinforced polyurethane
foam-based liqueed natural gas insulation structure under a cyclic impact load, as well as a unidirectional static load.
Although these damage models are well dened and widely
adopted, both the numerical derivation and implementation
procedure for nite elements are considerably complicated. There
are two reasons. (1) Most of the damage models were designed for
isotropic ductile materials. Thus, it is difcult to apply a general
damage model to anisotropic brittle materials. (2) Much effort is
required to identify the material parameters of a damage model,
i.e., an enormous number of material test results should be
obtained to dene the exact material parameters.
Consequently, in the present study, stress-based Puck failure
criterion were adopted to predict the evolution of damage. Namely,
the damage initiation and growth were detected based on Pucks
criteria and material stiffness degradation method, respectively.
This approach is relatively simple and extensively used by composite researchers for strength estimation, as well as for progressive
failure analysis, and there have been a few reports of good agreement with the results of experiments, such as McCarthy et al.
[29] and Tay et al. [12].
The elastic stressstrain constitutive relation, ber and matrix
damage variable with respect to the tensile and compressive stress
states, and material constants for the initial and damage-coupled
material stiffness for orthotropic composite laminates can be
written as follows.

Table 7
Dimensions and ply orientations of test specimen.
Laminate layup

D (mm)

W (mm)

T (mm)

L (mm)

[(0/90)6]S
[(0/45/90)3]S
[(45)6]S

6.35

25.4

3.175

203.2

Table 8
Material properties of T300/1304-C test specimen.
Fig. 3. Example of loading and boundary conditions for case B.

Property

T300/1304-C

E11 (MPa)
E22 (MPa)
G12 (MPa)

146,858
11,376
6185
0.30
230,000
0.2
1.807
0.652
1731
1379
67
268
134

m12
Ef1 (MPa)

mf12
e1T (%)
e1C (%)

Fig. 4. Congurations of T300/1304-C test specimen.

XT (MPa)
XC (MPa)
YT (MPa)
YC (MPa)
S12 (MPa)

410

C.-S. Lee et al. / Composite Structures 121 (2015) 406419

(a) Ply stacking sequence [(0/45/90)3]S

(b) 0 fiber angle direction at 1st ply

(c) +45 fiber angle direction at 2nd ply

(d) -45 fiber angle direction at 3rd ply

(e) 90 fiber angle direction at 4th ply

Fig. 5. Ply stacking sequence and ber angle direction for T300/1034-C composite laminate.

Fig. 6. Loading and boundary conditions for T300/1034-C composite laminate.

8
r11 9
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
r
22 >
>
>
>
>
>
>
<
=

C 22 C 23

C 23 C 33

C 11 C 12 C 13

6C
6 12
6
6 C 13
r33
6
6 0
>
>
r
12
>
>
6
>
>
>
>
6
>
>
>
r23 >
>
> 4 0
>
>
:
;
0
r31

0 2G12

2G23

2G31

9
38
e11 >
>
>
>
>
>
7>
>
e22 >
>
>
7>
>
>
>
>
7<
7 e33 =
7
7> e >
12 >
7>
>
>
>
7>
>
>
5>
e
>
>
23 >
>
>
:
;

e31

df 1  1  dft 1  dfc

12

dm 1  1  dmt 1  dmc

13

C 11 1  df C 011

14

C 22 1  df 1  dm C 022

15

11

411

C.-S. Lee et al. / Composite Structures 121 (2015) 406419

C 33 1  df 1  dm C 033

16

dm C 012

17

C 23 1  df 1  dm C 023

18

C 12 1  df 1 

C 13 1  df 1 

dm C 013

19
smc dmc G012

20

G23 1  df 1  smt dmt 1  smc dmc G023

21

G31 1  df 1  smt dmt 1  smc dmc G031

22

C 011 E011 1  m23 m32 D

23

C 022

 m13 m31 D

24

C 033 E033 1  m12 m21 D

25

C 012

m m31 m23 D

26

C 023 E022 m32 m12 m31 D

27

C 013 E011 m31 m21 m32 D

28

D 1=1  m12 m21  m23 m32  m31 m13  2m21 m32 m13

29

G12 1  df 1  smt dmt 1 

E022 1

E011 21

where Cij and C 0ij

are the initial and damaged material stiffness tensors,

respectively; df and dm are the total damage variables for the ber and
matrix, respectively; dft, dfc, dmt, and dmc are the ber and matrix damage variables in relation to the tensile and compressive stress states,
respectively; mij is the Poisson ratio tensor; and smt and smc are the loss
control factors for the shear stiffness caused by the matrix tensile and
compressive failures, respectively. In the present study, the loss
control factors were postulated as smt = 0.9 and smt = 0.5.
3. Computational analysis procedures
3.1. Initial/progressive failure analysis procedure using ABAQUS userdened subroutine
The stresses and strains for each element, as well as the material properties, were implemented into the Puck failure criterion
in order to predict the initial failures of composite laminates under
arbitrary loads.
Once the failure was disclosed, the material stiffness of the
initially failed element was replaced by zero in compliance with
Eqs. (14)(22). This method is the so-called element weakening
method (EWM) in the nite element (FE) procedure [26,28]. The
application conditions for the EWM for the tensile and compressive
ber and matrix failure modes are listed in Table 3.
The aforementioned theory for the Puck failure criterion and the
material stiffness degradation model were implemented in the
commercial FEA code (ABAQUS) user-dened subroutine UMAT
in the present study. The computational algorithm that includes
the EWM is shown in Fig. 1.
As shown in this gure, two types of analyses were carried out: an
initial failure analysis and a complete failure analysis. During the former analysis, the stresses and strains of each element were calculated using the constitutive relation (Eq. (11)) and its associated
engineering constants (Eqs. (23)(29)). In addition, the initial failure
was estimated based on the Puck failure criterion (Eqs. (1)(5)). If a
failure was detected in any single element, the EWM was applied to
the damaged element. Then, the material stiffness was modied
using Eqs. (12)(22), and the stresses and strains were calculated
repeatedly until the regions of interest completely failed. Finally, it

was possible to obtain the stress, strain, and damage contours of

the composite laminate nite elements, and we could predict the
structural failure under given loading and boundary conditions.
3.2. Target materials for computational analyses
In the present study, two types of comparison approaches were
introduced to verify the proposed computational analysis method,
i.e., validation through (1) failure stress envelope, and (2) damage
propagation simulation. Hence, two different kinds of target materials were used for both validations.
There are numerous experimental results available for composite laminate failures under arbitrary loads. However, in the present
study, the results presented by Sodens research team [68], and
Changs research team [11,30] were selected for validations of failure stress envelope and damage propagation, respectively.
3.2.1. Composite laminates for failure stress envelope validation
The composite laminates for validation of failure stress were
fabricated from E-glass 21xK43 glass ber and an LY556 epoxy
matrix, and AS4 carbon ber and a 3501-6 epoxy matrix. The laminate layups for the glass-ber-reinforced polymer (GFRP) and carbon-ber-reinforced polymer (CFRP) were [90/30]S and [90/45/
0]S, respectively. The material properties and ply thickness for each
material are listed in Tables 4 and 5, respectively.
Although a parameter used in Eqs. (5) and (6), mrf (i.e., the magnication factor of the mean stress for ber in the x2 material
direction), could be determined by experiment, simple values for
this parameter (mrf = 1.3 for GFRP and mrf = 1.1 for CFRP) were
recommended by Puck and Schrmann [5].
Fig. 2 illustrates the total stacking sequence and ber direction
at each ply of the E-glass/LY556 laminate in the ABAQUS FE model.
The hexahedral continuum shell element, i.e., SC8R in ABAQUS,
was adopted for the FE modeling, and the length and width of
the test specimen were postulated to each be 10 mm because these
two dimensions were not important when investigating the initial
and progressive failures of a test specimen under an in-plane stress
state [6,7].

Table 9
Analysis cases for initial failure analyses.

A
B
c

Case

Loading condition

Initial failure

A-1
A-2
A-3
A-4
A-5
A-6
A-7
A-8
B-1
B-2
B-3
B-4
B-5
B-6
B-7
B-8
C-1
C-2
C-3
C-4
C-5
C-6
C-7
C-8

rx = 25 MPa, ry = 25 MPa
rx = 100 MPa, ry = 100 MPa
rx = 150 MPa, ry = 150 MPa
rx = 250 MPa, ry = 250 MPa
rx = 10 MPa, ry = 50 MPa
rx = 100 MPa, ry = 50 MPa
rx = 200 MPa, ry = 10 MPa
rx = 250 MPa, ry = 10 MPa
rx = 10 MPa, sxy = 30 MPa
rx = 10 MPa, sxy = 60 MPa
rx = 50 MPa, sxy = 40 MPa
rx = 50 MPa, sxy = 80 MPa
rx = 150 MPa, sxy = 40 MPa
rx = 150 MPa, sxy = 80 MPa
rx = 200 MPa, sxy = 40 MPa
rx = 200 MPa, sxy = 80 MPa
rx = 100 MPa, ry = 100 MPa
rx = 300 MPa, ry = 300 MPa
rx = 600 MPa, ry = 600 MPa
rx = 900 MPa, ry = 900 MPa
rx = 100 MPa, ry = 200 MPa
rx = 300 MPa, ry = 200 MPa
rx = 200 MPa, ry = 100 MPa
rx = 600 MPa, ry = 100 MPa

Xa
Ob
X
O
Cc
O
X
O
X
O
X
O
X
O
C
O
X
O
X
O
X
O
X
O

Not failed.
Failed.
Almost failed.

412

C.-S. Lee et al. / Composite Structures 121 (2015) 406419

(a) Case A

(b) Case B

(c) Case C
Fig. 7. Initial failure stress envelopes and analysis cases.

The loading cases for the initial/progressive failure analyses are

listed in Table 6. During the analysis, the in-plane stress states (ry
vs rx and rx vs sxy) were considered because of the limitation of the
experimental results of the research by Soden et al. [6,7].
In addition, an example of the loading and boundary conditions for
case B is illustrated in Fig. 3. As shown in this gure, two edges of the
FE model are simply supported, namely, UX = 0 and UY = 0, and the
other edges are incrementally loaded by normal and shear stresses.
3.2.2. Composite laminates for damage propagation validation
The composite laminates for validation of damage propagation
were made of T300/1034-C graphite/epoxy prepreg tapes. The congurations and the dimensions/ply orientations of the test specimen are shown in Fig. 4 and Table 7, respectively, and the
material properties of T300/1034-C are listed in Table 8.
Fig. 5 demonstrates the total stacking sequence and ber direction at each ply of the T300/1034-C composite laminate in the
ABAQUS FE model. The element type is equal to the case of failure
stress envelope validation, namely, the hexahedral continuum
shell element, i.e., SC8R in ABAQUS, was selected for the FE modeling. In order to reduce the computational time, 1/4 model was
adopted during analysis.
The boundary and loading conditions are indicated on the FE
model of composite laminate as shown in Fig. 6. As shown in this
gure, left and bottom edge of the FE model are X- and Y-symmetry
conditions, respectively, and right edge is displacement-controlled
to X-direction.

4. Computational analysis results

4.1. Outline of computational analysis
As aforementioned in Section 3, two types of comparison
approaches were adopted in order to validate the developed
analysis method. Namely, initial and nal failures of composite
laminate plates under complex loads were evaluated by comparing
with the failure stress envelope for test results of composite
laminates. In addition, damage growth of laminated composites
containing stress concentration under axial loads were predicted
by comparing with the tensile test results of composite plies containing center hole.
4.2. Validation for failure stress envelope
4.2.1. Analysis scenario for initial failure
In order to verify the proposed method for prediction of initial
failure, the failure stress envelope for E-glass/LY556 and AS4/
3501-6 composite laminates that was already reported by Sodens
research group [68] was introduced in this study.
Table 9 lists the analysis scenarios for initial failure analyses
based on three types of loading cases. In order to validate the prediction capability of the proposed computational method for composite laminate damage, failure and no failure cases were equally
selected. Fig. 7 represents the initial failure stress envelopes and
analysis cases for the A, B, and C analysis scenarios.

C.-S. Lee et al. / Composite Structures 121 (2015) 406419

(a) Fiber failurecontour (case A-2)

(b) Matrix failurecontour (case A-2)

(c) Fiber failure contour (case B-2)

(d) Matrix failure contour (case B-2)

(e) Fiber failure contour (case C-2)

(f) Matrix failure contour (case C-2)

413

Fig. 8. Fiber/matrix failure contour based on Puck failure criterion for case A-2, B-2 and C-2.
Table 10
Initial failure analysis results and agreement with experimental results.

a
b
c

Table 11
Analysis cases for progressive failure analyses.

Case

PFFIa

PMFIb

Failure

Agreementc

Case

Loading condition

Failure state

A-1
A-2
A-3
A-4
A-5
A-6
A-7
A-8
B-1
B-2
B-3
B-4
B-5
B-6
B-7
B-8
C-1
C-2
C-3
C-4
C-5
C-6
C-7
C-8
Accuracy of analysis results (%)

0.0371
0.1483
0.4454
0.7424
0.2222
0.3327
0.4113
0.5116
0.0661
0.1384
0.1674
0.2333
0.3727
0.4379
0.4767
0.5415
0.1018
0.3054
0.7174
1.0760
0.3804
0.5059
0.3804
1.0470

0.4363
1.7450
0.9012
1.5020
1.5900
1.5740
0.9386
1.1720
0.7311
1.8240
3.4950
4.3120
0.8922
9.7880
1.0430
1.6640
0.4098
1.2290
0.5901
0.8852
0.5977
1.2550
0.5977
1.3040

X
O
X
O
C
O
X
O
X
O
X
O
X
O
C
O
X
O
X
O
X
O
X
O

O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
X
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
95.8

B-1
B-2
B-21
B-22
B-7
B-8
B-81
B-82

rx = 10 MPa, sxy = 30 MPa

rx = 10 MPa, sxy = 60 MPa
rx = 10 MPa, sxy = 150 MPa
rx = 10 MPa, sxy = 320 MPa
rx = 200 MPa, sxy = 40 MPa
rx = 200 MPa, sxy = 80 MPa
rx = 200 MPa, sxy = 125 MPa
rx = 200 MPa, sxy = 200 MPa

No failure
Initiation
Progression
Final
No failure
Initiation
Progression
Final

Puck ber failure index.

Puck matrix failure index.
Agreement between Puck failure analysis results and experimental results.

4.2.2. Analysis results and discussions for initial failure

Fig. 8 illustrates the initial failure analysis results for cases A-2,
B-2, and C-2 based on the Puck failure criterion. In this gure, the
gray domain means that the failure index exceeds 1.0 at each
element. As shown in this gure, the ber- and matrix-dependent
failures were separately predicted using the proposed ABAQUS
UMAT.

Although no ber failure was observed, matrix failures were

detected under the 100 MPa (case A-2) and 300 MPa (case C-2)
biaxial tension stress states, as shown in Fig. 8(b) and (f),
respectively. Similarly, a matrix failure occurred at the edge of
the boundary condition of the FE model, but no ber failure is
shown in Fig. 8(d).
In particular, a matrix failure index cannot be estimated using the
classical failure criteria such as the maximum stress/strain, Tsai
Hill, and TsaiWu criteria. Therefore, it is essential toadopt the
advanced failure criterion, e.g., the Puck criterion, for a precise estimation of the composite laminate-based structural failure.
Table 10 lists the two kinds of initial failure analysis results
using the proposed ABAQUS UMAT: the Puck ber failure index
(PFFI) and Puck matrix failure index (PMFI). In addition, the agreement and disagreement between the analysis and experiment are
listed.
As shown in this table, the analysis results agree with the experimental results with an accuracy of 95.8%. Although there is one
overestimation case such as case B-3 in PMFI under the rx and
sxy stress state, the proposed analysis method might be a robust
design tool for the detection of the initial failure of a composite
laminate because the analysis results are conservative from the
viewpoint of the safety factor.

414

C.-S. Lee et al. / Composite Structures 121 (2015) 406419

progressive failure analysis was performed using case B (E-glass/

LY556 under in-plane normal and shear stresses) because a nonuniform distribution of the in-plane stress was observed in case
B compared to the other analysis cases.
Table 11 lists the analysis scenarios for the progressive failure
analyses, and Fig. 9 illustrates the initial and nal failure stress
envelopes, analysis cases, and failure states under the various rx
and sxy stress conditions.
In this gure, cases B-1 and B-7 show the no failure state, cases
B-2 and B-8 illustrate the initial failure state, cases B-21 and B-8
1 demonstrate the progressive failure state, and cases B-22 and B82 show the nal failure state of the composite laminates. Hence,
it was conrmed that the safe, failure onset, failednot failed
mixed, and totally failed regions can be observed in the FE model
during the computational analysis.

Fig. 9. Initial and nal failure stress envelopes and analysis cases.

4.2.3. Analysis scenario for progressive failure

Similar to the initial failure prediction analysis, the failure stress
envelope from initial to nal failures that was already reported by
Sodens research group [68] was also adopted to validate the
computational method in the present study. In particular, a

(a) Fiber failure contour (case B-1)

(c) Fiber failure contour (case B-2-1)

(e) Matrix failure contour (case B-1)

(g) Matrix failure contour (case B-2-1)

4.2.4. Analysis results and discussions for progressive failure

Figs. 10 and 11 represent the numerical analysis results for progressive ber and matrix failures based on the Puck criterion for
cases B-1, B-2, B-21, and B-22, and cases B-7, B-8, B-81, and
B-82, respectively. As shown in these gures, as the magnitude
of the applied stress increases, the gray domain that represents
the failed region increases.
It is interesting that all of the elements in the matrix failure
mode change to gray, but not all of the elements in the ber failure
mode do. In particular, none of the elements in the Puck ber

(b) Fiber failure contour (case B-2)

(d) Fiber failure contour (case B-2-2)

(f) Matrix failure contour (case B-2)

(h) Matrix failure contour (case B-2-2)

Fig. 10. Progressive ber/matrix failure contours based on Puck failure criterion for case B-1/2/21/22.

415

C.-S. Lee et al. / Composite Structures 121 (2015) 406419

(a) Fiber failure contour (case B-7)

(b) Fiber failure contour (case B-8)

(c) Fiber failure contour (case B-8-1)

(d) Fiber failure contour (case B-8-2)

(e) Matrix failure contour (case B-7)

(f) Matrix failure contour (case B-8)

(g) Matrix failure contour (case B-8-1)

(h) Matrix failure contour (case B-8-2)

Fig. 11. Progressive ber/matrix failure contours based on Puck failure criterion for case B-7/8/81/82.

failure mode become gray. In other words, no progressive ber failure could be observed in the Puck ber failure during the calculation because the material damage of the ber was not affected by
the aforementioned stress state.
On the other hand, the characteristics of the progressive failure
rate were investigated in this study. Table 12 lists the failed elements from the no-failure to nal-failure analyses in cases B-2
and B-8, and Fig. 12 illustrates the relationship between the equivalent (von Mises) stress and the number of damaged elements. The
total number of elements in case B was 200.
As shown in this table and gure, as the equivalent stress
increases, the growth rate of the Puck matrix failure rapidly
increases. However, no Puck ber failure was observed during
the analysis. Hence, it could be conrmed that the in-plane complex stress could lead to a matrix failure rather than a ber failure
of a composite laminate.
Furthermore, the slope of the damage accumulation under a large
amount of compressive stress in the ber direction (case B
-7/B-8) is larger than that with a small amount of compressive stress
(case B-1/B-2). Therefore, it could be theorized that a matrix failure
expeditiously propagates under a compressive stress in the ber
direction. This result means that if the combined stresses such as
the in-plane shear stress and compressive stress in the ber direction
are applied to a composite structure, a catastrophic failure can occur.
Although the progressive failure rate could not be specically
validated because of the limitation of the experimental results,

Table 12
Failed elements from no-failure to nal-failure analyses.
Case

B-1
B-2
B-21
B-22
B-7
B-8
B-81
B-82
a
b

No. of failed elements

PFFa

PMFb

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
10
110
200
32
74
94
176

Puck ber failure.

Puck matrix failure.

the progressive failure magnitude could be veried using the introduced computational analysis method and ABAQUS UMAT, and the
analysis results were in good agreement with the results reported
in the literature [6,7]. Hence, it was conrmed that the developed
method could be a good analysis tool for initial and progressive
failure evaluations of composite laminate-based structures.
4.3. Validation for damage propagation
4.3.1. Analysis scenario
On the other hand, in order to validate the developed analysis
method for simulation of damage propagation, the ber and matrix

416

C.-S. Lee et al. / Composite Structures 121 (2015) 406419

(a) Case B-1/B-2

(b) Case B-7/B-8

Fig. 12. Relationship between equivalent (von Mises) stress and number of damaged elements for case B-1/B-2 and Case B-7/B-8.

(a) Fiber damage at P = 17,000N

(c) Fiber damage at P = 32,000N

(e) Matrix damage at P = 26,000N

(b) Fiber damage at P = 26,000N

(d) Matrix damage at P = 17,000N

(f) Matrix damage at P = 32,000N

Fig. 13. Damage propagation of [(0/90)6]S laminate under each loading increment.

C.-S. Lee et al. / Composite Structures 121 (2015) 406419

(a) Fiber damage at P = 13,000N

(c) Fiber damage at P = 21,000N

(e) Matrix damage at P = 17,000N

(b) Fiber damage at P = 17,000N

(d) Matrix damage at P = 13,000N

(f) Matrix damage at P = 21,000N

417

Fig. 14. Damage propagation of [(0/45/90)3]S laminate under each loading increment.

damage growth data of center-holed T300/1304-C test specimen

during the uniaxial tensile test that was previously addressed by
Changs research team [11,30] was applied in this study.
In the experimental results carried by Changs research group,
the ultimate tensile strengths as well as the damage propagations
were investigated with respect to seven kinds of stacking
sequences, namely, [(0/90)6]S, [(0/45/90)3]S, [(902/60/30)2]S,
[(45)6]S. [0/45/907]S, [0/(45)2/907]S and [0/(45)3/903]S, and
three kinds of width ratio (W/D), namely, 4.0, 6.0 and 8.0 for
T300/1304-C composite laminates. However, in the present study,
loaddisplacement and damage growth are simulated with respect
to three kinds of stacking sequence and W/D = 4.0 width ratio, as
aforementioned in Table 7. Furthermore, the right edge is displacement-controlled to the ber direction (X-direction) during the
analysis.
4.3.2. Analysis results and discussions
Figs. 1315 demonstrates the computational simulation results
for ber and matrix damage growth regarding to three kinds of

T300/1304-C test specimens, namely, [(0/90)6]S, [(0/45/90)3]S

and [(45)6]S laminates based on Puck failure criterion. The specic
failure characteristics of each simulation results are discussed
below.
Fig. 13 shows the growth of ber and matrix damage of [(0/
90)6]S laminate at the 17,000 N, 26,000 N and 32,000 N loading
states. The initial matrix damage was observed in the region of
center hole under approximately 17,000 N. As the load was
increased, the matrix damage was propagated through the laminates. In addition, the ber damage was also investigated at the
domain of center hole under about 26,000 N. The failed region
induced by matrix crack is much wider than that induced by ber
breakage. Finally, the test specimen was totally failed when the
load was approached approximately 32,000 N.
Fig. 14 demonstrates the growth of ber and matrix damage of
[(0/45/90)3]S laminate at the 13,000 N, 17,000 N and 21,000 N
loading states. Similar to the [(0/90)6]S laminate, the matrix cracking was initiated on the center hole region under approximately
13,000 N. As the load is increased from 17,000 N to 21,000 N, the

418

C.-S. Lee et al. / Composite Structures 121 (2015) 406419

(a) Fiber damage at P = 9,800N

(c) Fiber damage at P = 10,200N

(e) Matrix damage at P = 10,000N

(b) Fiber damage at P = 10,000N

(d) Matrix damage at P = 9,800N

(f) Matrix damage at P = 10,200N

Fig. 15. Damage propagation of [(45)6]S laminate under each loading increment.
Table 13
Comparison of failure stresses of T300/1304-C laminates.
Stacking sequence Chang and Chang

Present study

Error (%)

Initial failure stress (MPa) Final failure stress (MPa) Initial failure stress (MPa) Final failure stress (MPa) Initial failure stress Final failure stress
[(0/90)6]S
[(0/45/90)3]S
[(45)6]S

232
177
121

414
281
127

322
161
109

Average

cracking was propagated to the perpendicular direction from the

loading direction, especially, it was concentrated in the region of
center hole. However, the mixed failure of ber breakage and
matrix cracking was represented to the 45 from the loading direction when the load was reached approximately 21,000 N.
Fig. 15 represents the growth of ber and matrix damage of
[(45)6]S laminate at the 8,800 N, 9,000 N and 9,200 N loading
states. This laminate show slightly different failure aspect among

397
260
114

9.01
8.67
10.08

4.08
7.43
10.08

9.25

7.20

other laminates. Namely, the ber breakage was occurred on the

center hole under about 9,800 N. And then, as the load is
marginally increased, the small amount of ber damage was propagated along the 90 from the loading direction. At last, the test
specimen was entirely fractured under approximately 10,200 N.
One of the distinguished characteristic of this test specimen is that
the failed region of matrix cracking as well as ber breakage is relatively sharp.

C.-S. Lee et al. / Composite Structures 121 (2015) 406419

Although the damaged zone of each test specimen is not exactly

coincided with the literature [11] due to the difference of failure
criterion, the damage propagation tendency of matrix cracking
and ber breakage under each load increment is corresponded
with the literature as shown in Figs. 1315.
On the other hand, Table 13 represents the comparison of stresses at initial and nal failure states between literature and present
study. As shown in this table, the simulation results underestimated the ultimate stress approximately 710% compared to the
calculation results of literature. Although there is somewhat of
an error in present analysis results, it was conrmed that the proposed analysis method could be considered as a practical design
tool for the detection of the progressive failure of a composite laminate since the amount of error is reasonable and the analysis
results are conservative from the viewpoint of the safety factor.

5. Concluding remarks
In the present study, the onset and growth of cracks in a CFRP/
GFRP composite laminate were successfully estimated and
predicted using the Puck failure criterion and a damage
mechanism-based computational method. Furthermore, the
numerical analysis results were compared to the failure test results
previously reported in the literature.
The primary research results and further study topics are listed
below.
 A new computational analysis method for the practical evaluation of the initial and progressive failures of glass/carbon berreinforced composite laminates using advanced assessment
function such as the Puck failure criterion was developed based
on the user-dened subroutine UMAT in the commercial FEA
code ABAQUS.
 Through a comparative study, i.e., a comparison to the initial/
nal failure stress envelope as well as the damage propagation
of various types of test specimens, it was conrmed that the
simulation results agreed well with the reported composite failure results.
 Based on the proposed subroutine and methodology, it might be
possible to conduct the structural failure analyses of large and
complex composite structures. Most signicantly, a matrix
failure, which is the most difcult failure mode to predict,
could be effectively estimated using the developed analysis
tool.
 The proposed assessment method could be a robust analysis/
design tool for the structural safety evaluation of composite
laminate-based structures such as wind turbine blades and
marine composite propellers under static loads because the
method satises the evaluation methodology, which is regularized by classication society rules [10].
 In a future study, the failure characteristics of composite
laminates under fatigue and impact loads will be investigated,
and an advanced estimation method will be proposed in order
to predict the structural performance of a composite laminate.

Acknowledgements
This research was nancially supported by the Ministry of
Education (MOE) and National Research Foundation of Korea
(NRF-2013H1B8A2078346) through the Human Resource Training
Project for Regional Innovation (2013 Pilot Project). In addition,
this research was supported by Basic Science Research Program
through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded
by the Ministry of Education (No. 2014R1A1A2006102).

419

References
[1] Pavlou D. Composite materials in piping applications: design, analysis and
optimization of subsea and onshore pipelines from FRP materials. DEStech
Publications; 2013.
[2] Young YL. Fluidstructure interaction analysis of exible composite marine
propeller. J Fluids Struct 2008;24:799818.
[3] Motley MR, Liu Z, Young YL. Utilizing uidstructure interactions to improve
energy efciency of composite marine propellers in spatially varying wake.
Compos Struct 2009;90:30413.
[4] Hashin Z. Failure criteria for unidirectional ber composites. J Appl Mech
1980;47:32934.
[5] Puck A, Schrmann H. Failure analysis of FRP laminates by means of
physically based phenomenological models. Compos Sci Technol 1998;58:
104567.
[6] Soden PD, Hinton MJ, Kaddour AS. Lamina properties, lay-up congurations
and loading conditions for a range of bre-reinforced composite laminates.
Compos Sci Technol 1998;58:101122.
[7] Soden PD, Hinton MJ, Kaddour AS. A comparison of the predictive capabilities
of current failure theories for composite laminates. Compos Sci Technol
1998;58:122554.
[8] Hinton MJ, Kaddour AS, Soden PD. A comparison of the predictive capabilities
of current failure theories for composite laminates, judged against
experimental evidence. Compos Sci Technol 2002;62:172597.
[9] Kaddour AS, Hinton MJ, Soden PD. A comparison of the predictive capabilities
of current failure theories for composite laminates: additional contributions.
Compos Sci Technol 2004;64:44976.
[10] Germanischer Lloyd, Guideline for the Certication of Wind Turbines,
Germanischer Lloyd, 2010.
[11] Chang FK, Chang KY. A progressive damage model for laminated composites
containing stress concentrations. J Compos Mater 1987;21:83455.
[12] Tay TE, Liu G, Tan VBC, Sun XS, Pham DC. Progressive failure analysis of
composites. J Compos Mater 2008;42:192146.
[13] Liu PF, Zheng JY. Progressive failure analysis of carbon ber/epoxy composite
laminates using continuum damage mechanics. Mater Sci Eng A 2008;485:
7117.
[14] Reddy YSN, Dakshina Moorthy CM, Reddy JN. Non-linear progressive failure
analysis of laminated composite plates. Int J Non Linear Mech 1995;30:
62949.
[15] Maimi P, Camanho PP, Mayugo JA, Davila CG. A continuum damage model for
composite laminates: Part I constitutive model. Mech Mater 2007;39:
897908.
[16] Maimi P, Camanho PP, Mayugo JA, Davila CG. A continuum damage model for
composite laminates: Part II computational implementation and validation.
Mech Mater 2007;39:90919.
[17] Maimi P, Mayugo JA, Camanho PP. A three-dimensional damage model for
transversely isotropic composite laminates. J Compos Mater 2008;42: 271745.
[18] Zhang BM, Zhao L. Progressive damage and failure modeling in berreinforced laminated composites containing a hole. Int J Damage Mech
2012;21:893911.
[19] Ubaid J, Kashfuddoja M, Ramji M. Strength prediction and progressive failure
analysis of carbon ber reinforced polymer laminate with multiple interacting
holes involving three dimensional nite element analysis and digital image
correlation. Int J Damage Mech 2014;23:60935.
[20] Puck A, Kopp J, Knops M. Guidelines for the determination of the parameters in
Pucks action plane strength criterion. Compos Sci Technol 2002;62:3718.
[21] Toi Y, Lee JM. Thermal elasto-viscoplastic damage behavior of structural
members in hot-dip galvanization. Int J Damage Mech 2002;11:17185.
[22] Lee CS, Kim MH, Mahendran M, Lee JM. Computational study on the fatigue
behavior of welded structures. Int J Damage Mech 2011;20:42363.
[23] Lee CS, Chun MS, Kim MH, Lee JM. Numerical evaluation for debonding failure
phenomenon of adhesively bonded joints at cryogenic temperatures. Compos
Sci Technol 2011;71:19219.
[24] Kim JH, Lee CS, Kim MH, Lee JM. Prestrain-dependent viscoplastic damage
model for austenitic stainless steel and implementation to ABAQUS userdened material subroutine. Comput Mater Sci 2013;67:27381.
[25] Kim SK, Lee CS, Kim JH, Kim MH, Lee JM. Computational evaluation of
resistance of fracture capacity for SUS304L of liqueed natural gas insulation
system under cryogenic temperatures using ABAQUS user-dened material
subroutine. Mater Des 2013;50:52232.
[26] Lee CS, Yoo BM, Kim MH, Lee JM. Viscoplastic damage model for austenitic
stainless steel and its application to the crack propagation problem at
cryogenic temperatures. Int J Damage Mech 2013;22:95115.
[27] Kim JH, Kim SK, Kim MH, Lee JM. Numerical model to predict deformation
of corrugated austenitic stainless steel sheet under cryogenic temperatures
for design of liqueed natural gas insulation system. Mater Des 2014;57:
2639.
[28] Lee CS, Lee JM. Failure analysis of reinforced polyurethane foam-based LNG
insulation structure using damage-coupled nite element analysis. Compos
Struct 2014;107:23145.
[29] McCarthy CT, McCarthy MA, Lawlor VP. Progressive damage analysis of multibolt composite joints with variable bolt-hole clearances. Compos B Eng
2005;36:290305.
[30] Chang FK, Scott RA, Springer GS. Failure of composite laminates containing pin
loaded holes method of solution. J Compos Mater 1984;18:25578.